1. This revision petition has been preferred against order dated 12.5.1995 passed by the Second Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Guna.

2. The facts necessary for the disposal of tee case in brief are that a suit was filed by the respondent against the petitioner which was decreed ex parte. An application purporting to be under O. 9 R. 13 CPC was moved by the revisionist for setting aside the ex parte decree. The learned trial Court vide its order dated 3.1.95 rejected the application. The revisionist preferred an appeal before the Second A.D.J. Ashoknagar, purporting to be u/s. 96 CPC against judgment and decree dated 8.10.92 passed inasuit No. 4/A/91 and the order dated 3.1.95 passed in M.C.C. No. 492. An application purporting to be u/s. 5, Limitation Act was also made for condonation of delay. The learned lower Court by the impugned order considered the application u/s. 5 of the Limitation Act and also made observations about the application for setting aside the exparte order but finally rejected the appeal holding that it was barred by time. Feeling aggrieved this revision petition has been preferred by the defendant.

3. The learned counsel for the revisi